Effects of Antiarrhythmic Drugs on Antiepileptic Drug Action-A Critical Review of Experimental Findings.

Severe cardiac arrhythmias developing in the course of seizures increase the risk of SUDEP (sudden unexpected death in epilepsy). Hence, epilepsy patients with pre-existing arrhythmias should receive appropriate pharmacotherapy. Concomitant treatment with antiarrhythmic and antiseizure medications creates, however, the possibility of drug-drug interactions. This is due, among other reasons, to a similar mechanism of action. Both groups of drugs inhibit the conduction of electrical impulses in excitable tissues. The aim of this review was the analysis of such interactions in animal seizure models, including the maximal electroshock (MES) test in mice, a widely accepted screening test for antiepileptic drugs.

How Antidepressant Drugs Affect the Antielectroshock Action of Antiseizure Drugs in Mice: A Critical Review.

Depression coexists with epilepsy, worsening its course. Treatment of the two diseases enables the possibility of interactions between antidepressant and antiepileptic drugs. The aim of this review was to analyze such interactions in one animal seizure model-the maximal electroshock (MES) in mice. Although numerous antidepressants showed an anticonvulsant action, mianserin exhibited a proconvulsant effect against electroconvulsions. In most cases, antidepressants potentiated or remained ineffective in relation to the antielectroshock action of classical antiepileptic drugs. However, mianserin and trazodone reduced the action of valproate, phenytoin, and carbamazepine against the MES test. Antiseizure drug effects were potentiated by all groups of antidepressants independently of their mechanisms of action. Therefore, other factors, including brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and glial-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) modulation, should be considered as the background for the effect of drug combinations.

Sotalol does not interfere with the antielectroshock action of selected second-generation antiepileptic drugs in mice.

BACKGROUND: Due to blocking ß-receptors, and potassium KCNH2 channels, sotalol may influence seizure phenomena. In the previous study, we have shown that sotalol potentiated the antielectroshock action of phenytoin and valproate in mice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As a continuation of previous experiments, we examined the effect of sotalol on the action of four chosen second-generation antiepileptic drugs (oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, pregabalin, and topiramate) against the maximal electroshock in mice. Undesired effects were evaluated in the chimney test (motor impairment) and step-through passive-avoidance task (long-term memory deficits). Finally, brain concentrations of antiepileptics were determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay, while those of sotalol by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Sotalol at doses of up to 100 mg/kg did not affect the electroconvulsive threshold. Applied at doses of 80-100 mg/kg, sotalol did not affect the antielectroshock action of oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, pregabalin, or topiramate. Sotalol alone and in combinations with antiepileptics impaired neither motor performance nor long-term memory. Finally, sotalol significantly decreased the brain concentrations of lamotrigine and increased those of oxcarbazepine and topiramate. Pharmacokinetic interactions, however, did not influence the final antielectroshock effects of above-mentioned drug combinations. On the other hand, the brain concentrations of sotalol were not changed by second-generation antiepileptics used in this study. CONCLUSION: Sotalol did not reduce the antielectroshock action of four second-generation antiepileptic drugs examined in this study. Therefore, this antidepressant drug should not interfere with antiseizure effects of lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, pregabalin, and topiramate in patients with epilepsy. To draw final conclusions, our preclinical data should still be confirmed in other experimental models and clinical conditions.

Acute and chronic treatment with moclobemide, a reversible MAO-inhibitor, potentiates the antielectroshock activity of conventional antiepileptic drugs in mice.

BACKGROUND: Due to enhancing serotonergic and noradrenergic neurotransmission, moclobemide may influence seizure phenomena. In this study, we examined the effect of both acute and chronic treatment with moclobemide on seizures and the action of first-generation antiepileptic drugs: valproate, carbamazepine, phenobarbital and phenytoin. METHODS: The effect of moclobemide on seizures was assessed in the electroconvulsive threshold test, while its influence on antiepileptic drugs was estimated in the maximal electroshock test in mice. Undesired effects were evaluated in the chimney test (motor impairment) and step-through passive-avoidance task (long-term memory deficits). Finally, brain concentrations of antiepileptics were determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay. RESULTS: Given acutely, moclobemide at 62.5 and 75 mg/kg increased the electroconvulsive threshold. In contrast, chronic treatment with moclobemide up to 75 mg/kg did not influence this parameter. Acute moclobemide applied at subthreshold doses (up to 50 mg/kg) enhanced the antielectroshock effects of carbamazepine, valproate and phenobarbital. Chronic moclobemide (37.5-75 mg/kg) increased the action of all four antiepileptic drugs. All revealed interactions, except these between moclobemide and phenobarbital, seem to have pharmacokinetic nature, because the antidepressant drug, either in acute or in chronic treatment, increased the brain concentrations of respective antiepileptic drugs. In terms of undesired neurotoxic effects, acute and chronic moclobemide, antiepileptic drugs, and their combinations did not produce significant motor or long-term memory impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Acute and chronic therapy with moclobemide can increase the effectiveness of some antiepileptic drugs against the maximal electroshock test. In mice, this effect was, at least partially, due to pharmacokinetic interactions. So far as the results of experimental studies can be transferred to clinical conditions, moclobemide seems safe for the application in patients with epilepsy and depression. Possibly, in the case of certain antiepileptic drugs combined with moclobemide, their doses should be adjusted downwards.

Interactions of antiepileptic drugs with drugs approved for the treatment of indications other than epilepsy.

Introduction: Comorbidities of epilepsy may significantly interfere with its treatment as diseases in the general population are also encountered in epilepsy patients and some of them even more frequently (for instance, depression, anxiety, or heart disease). Obviously, some drugs approved for other than epilepsy indications can modify the anticonvulsant activity of antiepileptics. Areas covered: This review highlights the drug-drug interactions between antiepileptics and aminophylline, some antidepressant, antiarrhythmic (class I-IV), selected antihypertensive drugs and non-barbiturate injectable anesthetics (ketamine, propofol, etomidate, and alphaxalone). The data were reviewed mainly from experimental models of seizures. Whenever possible, clinical data were provided. PUBMED data base was the main search source.Expert opinion: Aminophylline generally reduced the protective activity of antiepileptics, which, to a certain degree, was consistent with scarce clinical data on methylxanthine derivatives and worse seizure control. The only antiarrhythmic with this profile of action was mexiletine when co-administered with VPA. Among antidepressants and non-barbiturate injectable anesthetics, trazodone, mianserin and etomidate or alphaxalone, respectively, negatively affected the anticonvulsant action of some antiepileptic drugs. Clinical data indicate that only amoxapine, bupropion, clomipramine and maprotiline should be used with caution. Possibly, drugs reducing the anticonvulsant potential of antiepileptics should be avoided in epilepsy patients.

Role of oxidative stress in epileptogenesis and potential implications for therapy.

In a state of balance between oxidants and antioxidants, free radicals play an advantageous role of "redox messengers". In a state of oxidative stress, they trigger a cascade of events leading to epileptogenesis. During this latent, free of seizures period, a cascade of neurological changes takes place and finally leads to spontaneous recurrent seizures. The main processes involved in seizure generation are: neuroinflammation, neurodegeneration with anomalous neuroregeneration and lowering seizure threshold. Time of epileptogenesis offers a unique therapeutic window to prevent or at least attenuate seizure development. Animal data indicate that some antioxidants (for instance, resveratrol) may bear an anti-epileptogenic potential.

Nebivolol attenuates the anticonvulsant action of carbamazepine and phenobarbital against the maximal electroshock-induced seizures in mice.

BACKGROUND: Due to co-occurrence of seizures and cardiovascular disorders, nebivolol, a widely used selective ß1-blocker with vasodilatory properties, may be co-administered with antiepileptic drugs. Therefore, we wanted to assess interactions between nebivolol and four conventional antiepileptic drugs: carbamazepine, valproate, phenytoin and phenobarbital in the screening model of tonic-clonic convulsions. METHODS: Seizure experiments were conducted in the electroconvulsive threshold and maximal electroshock tests in mice. The chimney test served as a method of assessing motor coordination, whereas long-term memory was evaluated in the computerized step-through passive-avoidance task. To exclude or confirm pharmacokinetic interactions, we measured brain concentrations of antiepileptic drugs using the fluorescence polarization immunoassay. RESULTS: It was shown that nebivolol applied at doses 0.5-15 mg/kg did not raise the threshold for electroconvulsions. However, nebivolol at the dose of 15 mg/kg reduced the anti-electroshock properties of carbamazepine. The effect of valproate, phenytoin, and phenobarbital remained unchanged by combination with the ß-blocker. Nebivolol significantly decreased the brain concentration of valproate, but did not affect concentrations of remaining antiepileptic drugs. Therefore, contribution of pharmacokinetic interactions to the final effect of the nebivolol/carbamazepine combination seems not probable. Nebivolol alone and in combinations with antiepileptic drugs did not impair motor performance in mice. Nebivolol alone did not affect long-term memory of animals, and did not potentiate memory impairment induced by valproate and carbamazepine. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that nebivolol attenuated effectiveness of some antiepileptic drugs. In case the results are confirmed in clinical settings, this ß-blocker should be used with caution in epileptic patients.

Advances with extended and controlled release formulations of antiepileptics in the elderly.

INTRODUCTION: As a matter of course, elderly people are more sensitive to both the pharmacological and toxicological effects of pharmacotherapy. A senior's treatment, therefore, requires more attention compared to younger adults. Extended release (ER) formulations of anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) have been developed to improve safety, efficacy and long-term adherence. In senior patients, ER AEDs are used to treat epilepsy, psychiatric conditions, and neuropathic pain. However, very limited clinical evidence is available on the use of these ER AEDs in these populations. AREAS COVERED: The authors of this paper have identified clinical studies of ER AED formulations used in elderly populations through literature searches looking, both, at their use in epileptic and non-epileptic indications. Additionally, immediate release (IR) and ER formulations of AEDs were compared whenever possible. EXPERT OPINION: The broad use of ER AED formulations in elderly patients with swallowing problems is limited by the fact that ER AED tablets (or capsules) must not be cut, crushed or chewed. The only exception is the ER formulation of valproate or topiramate which can be mixed with soft food. Although, the ER formulations of AEDs seem better tolerated than the IR equivalents, a possibility of numerous interactions with drugs prescribed for other reasons must be carefully considered.

Interactions of Mexiletine with Novel Antiepileptic Drugs in the Maximal Electroshock Test in Mice: An Isobolographic Analysis.

The aim of the study was to evaluate precisely the type of interactions between mexiletine (an antiarrhythmic drug) and four new generation antiepileptic drugs: lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, topiramate and pregabalin in the maximal electroshock test in mice (MES). The isobolographic analysis was used to assess the nature of interactions between the tested drugs. Total brain concentrations of antiepileptics were also measured to detect possible pharmacokinetic interactions. The results obtained indicated that the mixture of mexiletine and pregabalin at the fixed ratios of 1:1 and 3:1 led to supra-additive interaction in terms of seizure suppression, while the proportion of 1:3 occurred additive. Synergism was also demonstrated for the combination of mexiletine and topiramate in all three proportions. Combinations of mexiletine with lamotrigine and mexiletine with oxcarbazepine were found to be additive. Adverse-effect profiles of mexiletine, antiepileptics and drug combinations were evaluated in the chimney test (motor coordination) and step-through passive-avoidance task (long-term memory). Mexiletine and drug combinations did not impair long-term memory. Moreover, all combinations of mexiletine with lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine and topiramate had no significant effect on motor coordination. However, the results from the chimney test indicated that pregabalin, administered alone at its ED50 dose from the MES-test, significantly impaired motor performance. Similar adverse effects were observed when mexiletine was co-administered with pregabalin at the fixed-dose ratio combinations of 1:1 and 1:3. However, reduction of pregabalin dose at the fixed ratio of 3:1 seems to prevent significant motor impairment. The results may indicate that mexiletine can be considered as an adjunctive drug in antiepileptic treatment, particularly in patients with concomitant cardiac arrhythmia.

Influence of propafenone on the anticonvulsant activity of various novel antiepileptic drugs in the mouse maximal electroshock model.

BACKGROUND: The main mechanism of action of propafenone (antiarrhythmic drug) involves the inhibition of the fast inward sodium current during phase 0 of the action potential. Sodium channel-blocking activity is also characteristic for some antiepileptic drugs. Therefore, it could be assumed that propafenone may also affect seizures. In the present study, we evaluated the effect of propafenone on the protective effect of oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, topiramate and pregabalin against the maximal electroshock-induced seizures in mice. METHODS: Anticonvulsant activity of propafenone was assessed with the maximal electroshock seizure threshold (MEST) test. Influence of propafenone on the anticonvulsant activity of antiepileptic drugs was estimated in the mouse maximal electroshock model (MES). Drug-related adverse effects were determined in the chimney test (motor coordination) and passive-avoidance task (long-term memory). Brain concentrations of antiepileptics were assessed by fluorescence polarization immunoassay. RESULTS: Propafenone at doses 60-90mg/kg significantly increased the threshold of seizures, in turn at doses 5-50mg/kg did not affect this parameter. Administration of propafenone at the subthreshold dose of 50mg/kg increased antielectroshock activity of oxcarbazepine, topiramate and pregabalin, but not that of lamotrigine. As regards adverse effects, propafenone alone and in combination with antiepileptic drugs did not significantly impair motor coordination or long-term memory in mice. Propafenone (50mg/kg) significantly increased the brain level of pregabalin. Brain concentrations of topiramate and oxcarbazepine were not affected. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that propafenone has own anticonvulsant action and enhances efficacy of oxcarbazepine, topiramate and pregabalin, but not that of lamotrigine, at least in experimental condition.

Amiodarone, a multi-channel blocker, enhances anticonvulsive effect of carbamazepine in the mouse maximal electroshock model.

Cardiac arrhythmia may occur in the course of epilepsy. Simultaneous therapy of the two diseases might be complicated by drug interactions since antiarrhythmic and antiepileptic agents share some molecular targets. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of amiodarone, an antiarrhythmic drug working as a multi-channel blocker, on the protective activity of four classical antiepileptic drugs in the maximal electroshock test in mice. Amiodarone at doses up to 75 mg/kg did not affect the electroconvulsive threshold in mice. Acute amiodarone at the dose of 75 mg/kg significantly potentiated the anticonvulsive effect of carbamazepine, but not that of valproate, phenytoin or phenobarbital in the maximal electroshock-induced seizures in mice. The antiarrhythmic agent and its combinations with antiepileptic drugs did not impair motor performance or long-term memory in mice, except for the combination of amiodarone and phenobarbital. Brain concentrations of antiepileptic drugs were not changed. Despite favourable impact of amiodarone on the anticonvulsive action of carbamazepine in the maximal electroshock, co-administration of the two drugs should be carefully monitored in clinical conditions. Further studies are necessary to evaluate effects of chronic treatment with amiodarone on seizure activity and the action of antiepileptic drugs.

Sotalol enhances the anticonvulsant action of valproate and diphenylhydantoin in the mouse maximal electroshock model.

BACKGROUND: Sotalol as a drug blocking ß-receptors and potassium KCNH2 channels may interact with different substances that affect seizures. Herein, we present interactions between sotalol and four conventional antiepileptic drugs: carbamazepine, valproate, phenytoin and phenobarbital. METHODS: Effects of sotalol and antiepileptics alone on seizures were determined in the electroconvulsive threshold test, while interactions between sotalol and antiepileptic drugs were estimated in the maximal electroshock test in mice. Motor coordination and long-term memory were evaluated, respectively, in the chimney test and passive-avoidance task. Brain concentrations of antiepileptics were determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay. RESULTS: Sotalol at doses up to 100mg/kg did not affect the electroconvulsive threshold. Applied at doses 60-100mg/kg, sotalol potentiated the antielectroshock action of valproate, while at doses 80-100mg/kg that of phenytoin. Sotalol (up to 100mg/kg) did not affect the action of carbamazepine or phenobarbital in the maximal electroshock. Sotalol alone and in combinations with antiepileptics impaired neither motor performance nor long-term memory in mice. Finally, sotalol did not change brain concentration of valproate and phenytoin, so pharmacokinetic interactions between the drugs are not probable. CONCLUSIONS: As far as obtained data may be extrapolated into clinical conditions, sotalol may be considered as an arrhythmic drug that does not reduce the action of classical antiepileptic drugs and thereby can be used in epileptic patients with cardiac arrhythmias.

Propafenone enhances the anticonvulsant action of classical antiepileptic drugs in the mouse maximal electroshock model.

BACKGROUND: Antiarrhythmic and antiepileptic drugs share some mechanisms of actions. Therefore, possibility of interactions between these in epileptic patients with cardiac arrhythmias is quite considerable. Herein, we attempted to assess interactions between propafenone and four conventional antiepileptic drugs: carbamazepine, valproate, phenytoin and phenobarbital. METHODS: Effects of propafenone on seizures were determined in the electroconvulsive threshold test in mice. Interactions between propafenone and antiepileptic drugs were estimated in the model of maximal electroshock. Motor coordination was evaluated in the chimney test, while long-term memory in the passive-avoidance task. Brain concentrations of antiepileptics were determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay. RESULTS: Propafenone up to 50mg/kg did not affect the electroconvulsive threshold, significantly enhancing this parameter at doses of 60-90mg/kg. Applied at its subthreshold doses, propafenone potentiated the antielectroshock action of all four tested classical antiepileptics: carbamazepine, valproate, phenytoin, and phenobarbital. Propafenone alone and in combinations with antiepileptics impaired neither motor performance nor long-term memory in mice. Propafenone did not change brain concentration of phenytoin and phenobarbital; however, it significantly decreased brain levels of carbamazepine and increased those of valproate. CONCLUSIONS: Propafenone exhibits its own anticonvulsant effect and enhances the action of classical antiepileptic drugs against electrically induced convulsions in mice. Further investigations are required to determine the effect of propafenone on antiepileptic therapy in humans.

Mexiletine and its Interactions with Classical Antiepileptic Drugs: An Isobolographic Analysis.

Using the mouse maximal electroshock test, the reference model of tonic-clonic seizures, the aim of the present study was to determine the type of interaction between mexiletine (a class IB antiarrhythmic drug) and classical antiepileptics: valproate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital. Isobolographic analysis of obtained data indicated antagonistic interactions between mexiletine and valproate (for fixed ratio combinations of 1:1 and 3:1). Additivity was observed between mexiletine and valproate applied in proportion of 1:3 as well as between mexiletine and remaining antiepileptics for the fixed ratios of 1:3, 1:1, and 3:1. Neither motor performance nor long-term memory were impaired by mexiletine or antiepileptic drugs regardless of whether they were administered singly or in combination. Mexiletine did not significantly affected brain concentrations of carbamazepine, phenobarbital or phenytoin. In contrast, the antiarrhythmic drug decreased by 23 % the brain level of valproate. This could be, at least partially, the reason of antagonistic interaction between the two drugs. In conclusion, the observed additivity suggests that mexiletine can be safely applied in epileptic patients treated with carbamazepine, phenytoin or phenobarbital. Because of undesirable pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetic interactions with valproate, mexiletine should not be used in such combinations.